solvs
Sep 27, 09:19 AM
Definitely can't wait for Aperture 1.5 though. Runs like a dog on my system. May have to start finally using it.
.jpg "flower hip tattoos. flowers")
I AM THE MAN
May 1, 01:02 PM
My father bought our Mac a few months ago, and I've been running Elements since. I've never had a problem with it until last week.
I would have a file open, and suddenly, Photoshop would quit and give me the "quit unexpectedly" dialog box.
It isn't foce closing on a specific action--it would be anything. If I wasn't using Photoshop but it was open, it would force quit when I went to a different page. If it was open and I was using a filter, it would force quit.
Photoshop would start up and make it to the editor, but from there, it would be unpredictable.
My father and I have trashed all the preference folders and uninstalled Photoshop, but that didn't help.
We have an iMac running Intel Core i3.
I have attached a copy of the crash report we receive after it force closing.
Im no expert, but have you recently updated the software? A recent update could cause problems. If you have recently updated the software, uninstall the whole program (make sure no settings, etc) are saved, and then reinstall the program and see if that fixes the problem. If it does, try to update the program back to the newest update that did not cause this problem.
I would have a file open, and suddenly, Photoshop would quit and give me the "quit unexpectedly" dialog box.
It isn't foce closing on a specific action--it would be anything. If I wasn't using Photoshop but it was open, it would force quit when I went to a different page. If it was open and I was using a filter, it would force quit.
Photoshop would start up and make it to the editor, but from there, it would be unpredictable.
My father and I have trashed all the preference folders and uninstalled Photoshop, but that didn't help.
We have an iMac running Intel Core i3.
I have attached a copy of the crash report we receive after it force closing.
Im no expert, but have you recently updated the software? A recent update could cause problems. If you have recently updated the software, uninstall the whole program (make sure no settings, etc) are saved, and then reinstall the program and see if that fixes the problem. If it does, try to update the program back to the newest update that did not cause this problem.
Link2999
Jun 12, 04:40 PM
I'd rather have T-Mobile than Verizon just because of costs. T-Mobile actually has decent plans compared to other cellular companies.
Digital Skunk
Feb 27, 04:33 PM
Let's say that the desktop and the server editions are DIFFERENT software. Ubuntu is a desktop OS with a full graphical user interface and Ubuntu Server is a full server platform WITHOUT ANY graphical user interface. Repeat: no GUI at all, leave your mouse at home, you won't be needing it. Instead, Ubuntu Server comes with options to be installed as a cloud server, a LAMP stack or for other typical server-only tasks like file and print or database or directory services.
But you are right that both Ubuntu versions use the same repositories and that with sufficient work one can eventually do what the other does or be configured to become the other edition; they are just pre-packaged for completely different uses.
While on the other hand, the OS X client before Lion could never become a full OS X server, at least not when you wanted to replicate or use Apple's proprietary server software and tools on the desktop version of the OS.
When I first read about, I still thought that they would be releasing another version of OS X server. But then I visited Apple's website and their wording didn't leave much room for interpretation: Yes, whatever server features Apple wants to save are now becoming a part of the standard package of OS X Lion. There won't be a separate server edition anymore.
And it makes sense. They buried their server business, so they don't need to develop, market, ship and support a separate server OS anymore.
This all goes along with some of the speculation in my neck of the woods. Apple may have just setup the Mac Pro server option as a temporary fix for those needing a dedicated server that wasn't a mini . . . since they murdered the Xserve.
There's no way anyone in the market for an Xserve will want to stick a Mac Pro in their racks, and a Mini just won't cut it power wise.
Putting the features that SoHo users want in a server in the desktop client will just push the desktop version further up the "what a deal" ladder and leave the Mac server business buried forever.
But you are right that both Ubuntu versions use the same repositories and that with sufficient work one can eventually do what the other does or be configured to become the other edition; they are just pre-packaged for completely different uses.
While on the other hand, the OS X client before Lion could never become a full OS X server, at least not when you wanted to replicate or use Apple's proprietary server software and tools on the desktop version of the OS.
When I first read about, I still thought that they would be releasing another version of OS X server. But then I visited Apple's website and their wording didn't leave much room for interpretation: Yes, whatever server features Apple wants to save are now becoming a part of the standard package of OS X Lion. There won't be a separate server edition anymore.
And it makes sense. They buried their server business, so they don't need to develop, market, ship and support a separate server OS anymore.
This all goes along with some of the speculation in my neck of the woods. Apple may have just setup the Mac Pro server option as a temporary fix for those needing a dedicated server that wasn't a mini . . . since they murdered the Xserve.
There's no way anyone in the market for an Xserve will want to stick a Mac Pro in their racks, and a Mini just won't cut it power wise.
Putting the features that SoHo users want in a server in the desktop client will just push the desktop version further up the "what a deal" ladder and leave the Mac server business buried forever.
more...
wake8260
Mar 24, 03:17 PM
None of the stores around me (10+ stores) have the 16gb in stock. Any of you considering the 32GB for $399?
Blue Fox
Jan 5, 02:25 AM
I wonder why the 2 plans have to be mutually exclusive. Why not download the whole database when you get it, for when you might not get coverage. And then automatically update when you do have coverage. When going somewhere, give priority updating to the current route and then download everything else. Maybe allow current route to be updated with EDGE/3G while whole database updates require Wi-Fi. Just my 2�
That's exactly what i was thinking, makes perfect sense to me. Have a download of the standard maps, and have them update themselves as you travel.
That's exactly what i was thinking, makes perfect sense to me. Have a download of the standard maps, and have them update themselves as you travel.
more...
ITR 81
Oct 9, 04:49 PM
DVD's are obviously pretty profitable or they wouldnt bother selling them, so what they are saying is if the movie companies let Apple sell movies they are gonna cut off their noses to spite their face and pull a really profitable sales line? I dont think so - ********* idiots.
Actually not really. I use to sell them in my store.
I'm sure they get a better deal then us but not that much better.
Normal DVD retail is like this.
DVD normal sells $24.95
DVD wholesale would be around $19.95
If I bought a case I would get them for $16.95.
This doesn't help when Best Buy and Target and Wal-Mart sell them at 19.95 for the very first week! I'm lucky if I make 5 bucks on DVD sales...then factor in shipping costs of the DVD's.
Selling DVD's is like selling comic books...you have to sell massive amounts of them to make any kind of money.
I figure Target and Wal-Mart make around 3-5 bucks on each DVD they sell.
Some folks ask us to match Wal-Marts and Targets and Best Buy pricing...but we can't normally. We can't even make any money of them now.
I once had a DVD for sale. It was priced at 24.95. I paid 19.95 for it. I marked it down to 20.95..to move it. Guy comes in to tell me Best Buy sells the same DVD for 14.99!
Actually not really. I use to sell them in my store.
I'm sure they get a better deal then us but not that much better.
Normal DVD retail is like this.
DVD normal sells $24.95
DVD wholesale would be around $19.95
If I bought a case I would get them for $16.95.
This doesn't help when Best Buy and Target and Wal-Mart sell them at 19.95 for the very first week! I'm lucky if I make 5 bucks on DVD sales...then factor in shipping costs of the DVD's.
Selling DVD's is like selling comic books...you have to sell massive amounts of them to make any kind of money.
I figure Target and Wal-Mart make around 3-5 bucks on each DVD they sell.
Some folks ask us to match Wal-Marts and Targets and Best Buy pricing...but we can't normally. We can't even make any money of them now.
I once had a DVD for sale. It was priced at 24.95. I paid 19.95 for it. I marked it down to 20.95..to move it. Guy comes in to tell me Best Buy sells the same DVD for 14.99!
whooleytoo
Sep 27, 05:58 AM
You're pretty close to nailing it there - in truth, they're still sheep and zealots, terms that imply a lack of ability to think for oneself and an over-the-top reaction when someone else makes up, or changes, their mind for them. It's the same morons, they just rush to extremes no matter what.
Woah, woah, woah.
First of all, the "cease and desist" letter wasn't posted here until the second page of the thread, hence all we had to go on was the other sites' reports. (And even I missed that one post until just now).
And even having read that letter, I'm still opposed to Apple's moves and intentions here. They're still trying to trademark the word "Pod", which I think is utterly farcical.
Never mind the delicious irony in Apple objecting to the phonetic similarity between iPod and MyPodder, when iPod was obviously chosen to leverage the phonetic similarity with a familiar word ("tripod") - could MyPodder not argue they were doing likewise? Never mind the fact that the Apple name was 'borrowed' from another company, and was the name of one of its products ("Classic") was taken verbatim from another company.
Woah, woah, woah.
First of all, the "cease and desist" letter wasn't posted here until the second page of the thread, hence all we had to go on was the other sites' reports. (And even I missed that one post until just now).
And even having read that letter, I'm still opposed to Apple's moves and intentions here. They're still trying to trademark the word "Pod", which I think is utterly farcical.
Never mind the delicious irony in Apple objecting to the phonetic similarity between iPod and MyPodder, when iPod was obviously chosen to leverage the phonetic similarity with a familiar word ("tripod") - could MyPodder not argue they were doing likewise? Never mind the fact that the Apple name was 'borrowed' from another company, and was the name of one of its products ("Classic") was taken verbatim from another company.
more...
batchtaster
Apr 5, 11:48 AM
That must mean I'm not normal. :D
If you're here, then probably not. These forums are filled with boring arguments discussions about pedantic little details that normal people usually don't give a crap about.
Penny is normal. Leonard and Sheldon are not, even if you can relate to them better (hopefully Leonard more than Sheldon).
Hasn't Apple always been known for producing systems usable by the Everyman? Whereas the ubermenschen were off using UNIX systems at first, followed by Linux, Apple computers have always appealed to those who wanted to pick up a computer and start working, without technology getting in the way, at least since the Macintosh...
Yes, but Apple's adoption of UNIX and open-source in Mac OS X via NeXT attracted the �bermenschen in a manner not seen during the years before. And with its increasing maturity and acceptance, Mac OS X - and subsequently iOS - has continued to attract them and the illusion that those �ber-geeky nickpicky details were the most important thing in the world.
Products - and not just Apple's but any technology - could be powered by hugs, rainbows and unicorn kisses running on a half-core processor and the normal person wouldn't care, as long as it's easy and enjoyable to use, and lets them do what they want to do without having to think about how or why it works the way it does. They don't care about the nuances of the definition of "Retina Display" or debate the conspiracies behind charging $0.99 for FaceTime (they'll either buy it or they won't). A computer is a toaster. They want to put bread in and get toast out.
It used to be that every computer was a box with a monitor attached. When iMac came out, people said "well it's all very nice, but my needs are special and I could never use an iMac. I still need a fully-loaded five-figure tower." Similarly, laptops were underpowered and people still used a desktop to get the "real work" done. iMac is now well and above its original base-model station, and the specs of laptops now make them desktop replacements, with laptop growth carving a big slice out of the desktop market. Likewise, while iPad and even iPad 2 are possibly not going to be all anyone will ever need, iPad 3, iPad 4 and so on will close the gap. But like iMac was back in the day, iPad is the right direction for the new segment - an appliance - and will evolve and mature.
If you're here, then probably not. These forums are filled with boring arguments discussions about pedantic little details that normal people usually don't give a crap about.
Penny is normal. Leonard and Sheldon are not, even if you can relate to them better (hopefully Leonard more than Sheldon).
Hasn't Apple always been known for producing systems usable by the Everyman? Whereas the ubermenschen were off using UNIX systems at first, followed by Linux, Apple computers have always appealed to those who wanted to pick up a computer and start working, without technology getting in the way, at least since the Macintosh...
Yes, but Apple's adoption of UNIX and open-source in Mac OS X via NeXT attracted the �bermenschen in a manner not seen during the years before. And with its increasing maturity and acceptance, Mac OS X - and subsequently iOS - has continued to attract them and the illusion that those �ber-geeky nickpicky details were the most important thing in the world.
Products - and not just Apple's but any technology - could be powered by hugs, rainbows and unicorn kisses running on a half-core processor and the normal person wouldn't care, as long as it's easy and enjoyable to use, and lets them do what they want to do without having to think about how or why it works the way it does. They don't care about the nuances of the definition of "Retina Display" or debate the conspiracies behind charging $0.99 for FaceTime (they'll either buy it or they won't). A computer is a toaster. They want to put bread in and get toast out.
It used to be that every computer was a box with a monitor attached. When iMac came out, people said "well it's all very nice, but my needs are special and I could never use an iMac. I still need a fully-loaded five-figure tower." Similarly, laptops were underpowered and people still used a desktop to get the "real work" done. iMac is now well and above its original base-model station, and the specs of laptops now make them desktop replacements, with laptop growth carving a big slice out of the desktop market. Likewise, while iPad and even iPad 2 are possibly not going to be all anyone will ever need, iPad 3, iPad 4 and so on will close the gap. But like iMac was back in the day, iPad is the right direction for the new segment - an appliance - and will evolve and mature.
BillyBobBongo
Mar 18, 07:44 AM
The picture that is shown tells you how much cheaper (in %) the other countries are (compared to The Netherlands)
Tell me about it, it's gone insane here...I've taken to filling up in unmaned stations so I can save a few extra few cents each time.
Tell me about it, it's gone insane here...I've taken to filling up in unmaned stations so I can save a few extra few cents each time.
more...
chrmjenkins
May 2, 12:04 PM
I hope it serves to make an argument to start withdrawing our troops.
Oppressed
Apr 24, 11:42 AM
Ignoring current situations and if I could have it any way I want:
Macbook Air 11.6''
- Intel I5 ULV, 6mb FSB
- Nvidia GeForce GTX 460M
- SD Card Slot
- Thunderbolt Port in ADDITION to 2 USB ports.
- Get rid of the bezel around the screen and either make the screen slightly larger or make it black edge similar to MBP.
I would just settle for the i5 and Nvidia chip. As for the collapsable ethernet port... moving parts? ew.
Macbook Air 11.6''
- Intel I5 ULV, 6mb FSB
- Nvidia GeForce GTX 460M
- SD Card Slot
- Thunderbolt Port in ADDITION to 2 USB ports.
- Get rid of the bezel around the screen and either make the screen slightly larger or make it black edge similar to MBP.
I would just settle for the i5 and Nvidia chip. As for the collapsable ethernet port... moving parts? ew.
more...
Frosticus
Mar 28, 08:53 AM
Can anyone tell me this:
When Snow Leopard was released, was the iMac line refreshed as well or were these different events?
Basically wondering if I will have to wait until WWDC for the new iMacs... :confused:
When Snow Leopard was released, was the iMac line refreshed as well or were these different events?
Basically wondering if I will have to wait until WWDC for the new iMacs... :confused:
jwa276
Sep 25, 10:38 AM
TRUE.
but maybe new mbp tomorrow :)
*sigh* that's what we've all been saying for the past MONTH..
I agree with the previous post of huge dissapointment. And from all the bad things I've heard about aperture and raw handling, I hope Lightroom blows it clean out of the water.
This sucks.
but maybe new mbp tomorrow :)
*sigh* that's what we've all been saying for the past MONTH..
I agree with the previous post of huge dissapointment. And from all the bad things I've heard about aperture and raw handling, I hope Lightroom blows it clean out of the water.
This sucks.
more...
wizard
Oct 6, 01:32 PM
No way in hell. They've already asked their developers to change app resolutions once. 3 screen sizes will never fly with developers.
99.999% likelihood of this being total nonsense.
More importantly if developers where paying attention they would have heard Apples very strong suggestion to avoid dependecies on screen size and resolution. Something Apple has been suggesting for years now.
99.999% likelihood of this being total nonsense.
More importantly if developers where paying attention they would have heard Apples very strong suggestion to avoid dependecies on screen size and resolution. Something Apple has been suggesting for years now.
thatisme
Mar 29, 07:57 AM
Robbieduncan is correct. The only reason the EF-S exists is because it's cheaper for Canon to make wide angle lenses with a short focus back (i.e. that the lens is closer to the mirror than EF lenses). It's purely consumer oriented! Lower-end - mid range cameras use the 1.6 FOVCF, making them inexpensive. Canon wants cheaper lenses so they can sell more lenses and cameras. That's it, plain and simple. They are technically identical to any EF lens in every other way but the mount depth.
Go get a EF lens and and EF-S lens and put them side by side. They are not the same. The mount depth is different, but so is your image circle and the size of the lens elements. With modifications to the mirror on a 5D, you can mount an EF-S lens safely, and your resulting image is a circular image, surrounded by a big black area in the corners of the picture. If your claim was true, you would have an identical image to that on a 1.6 FOVCF camera, which you do not.
Do a bit of research on the subject.
sample from photography-on-the.net of a modified 5D with an EF-S lens mounted
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v356/ragerman/IMG_3314.jpg
Go get a EF lens and and EF-S lens and put them side by side. They are not the same. The mount depth is different, but so is your image circle and the size of the lens elements. With modifications to the mirror on a 5D, you can mount an EF-S lens safely, and your resulting image is a circular image, surrounded by a big black area in the corners of the picture. If your claim was true, you would have an identical image to that on a 1.6 FOVCF camera, which you do not.
Do a bit of research on the subject.
sample from photography-on-the.net of a modified 5D with an EF-S lens mounted
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v356/ragerman/IMG_3314.jpg
more...
barkmonster
Apr 23, 03:48 AM
This is the primary design flaw with the iPad. This tablet can't be the normal person's computer unless every normal person has a tech friend/relative to keep the tablet working/updated. So while Woz is correct that the tablet will be the normal person's computer, Apple's iPad is not yet that tablet.
Same for all the iGadgets with an iTunes account attached. Why apple doesn't make the default behaviour "charge" not "sync" and then simply verify that it's not the same iTunes account and "do nothing" instead of the hassle of it hiding all your music if you plug an iDevice into a PC and you're mate decides to click eject for you if your charging off it.
I can understand the need to only offer syncing on a device that isn't internet and wifi enabled because the only way of adding stuff to it is to sync to a computer but for all the other devices, it would be good if it was 100% self-contained.
I'd have no issues getting a used Mac Mini then turning it into a media centre through an LCD TV at a later date because I eventually know a Mac Pro would be my best choice for running Pro Tools 9. Someone who just wants to listen to and buy music or video, send emails, view youTube clips and keep in touch on social networking sites doesn't necessarily need a computer when the iPad does it all. Apple could even offer a way of interfacing their external DVD from the Macbook Air with the iDevices so you can rip your own music to the device itself without even needing a computer.
Same for all the iGadgets with an iTunes account attached. Why apple doesn't make the default behaviour "charge" not "sync" and then simply verify that it's not the same iTunes account and "do nothing" instead of the hassle of it hiding all your music if you plug an iDevice into a PC and you're mate decides to click eject for you if your charging off it.
I can understand the need to only offer syncing on a device that isn't internet and wifi enabled because the only way of adding stuff to it is to sync to a computer but for all the other devices, it would be good if it was 100% self-contained.
I'd have no issues getting a used Mac Mini then turning it into a media centre through an LCD TV at a later date because I eventually know a Mac Pro would be my best choice for running Pro Tools 9. Someone who just wants to listen to and buy music or video, send emails, view youTube clips and keep in touch on social networking sites doesn't necessarily need a computer when the iPad does it all. Apple could even offer a way of interfacing their external DVD from the Macbook Air with the iDevices so you can rip your own music to the device itself without even needing a computer.
jacg
Sep 25, 04:58 PM
?????????
I can display a 10,000 x 8.000 pixel picture on an iPod if I throw away 99% of the data as well. But why would you want to use such a huge file for no reason? Not only would it take up vast amounts of space, but you have to process all that "throwing away" info on the fly.
The new videos take longer for you to download, use more storage space on the iPod, require the iPod to downsample at playback, and cost Apple more bandwidth.
So why would Apple do all this if they weren't in fact planing to USE the new format on an iPod? Soem may say "it's for rregular Macs", but this size is too SMALL for to build a new standard for computers. So the only conclusion I can reach is that it has to be for a new iPod to come...
Front Row? iTV?
I can display a 10,000 x 8.000 pixel picture on an iPod if I throw away 99% of the data as well. But why would you want to use such a huge file for no reason? Not only would it take up vast amounts of space, but you have to process all that "throwing away" info on the fly.
The new videos take longer for you to download, use more storage space on the iPod, require the iPod to downsample at playback, and cost Apple more bandwidth.
So why would Apple do all this if they weren't in fact planing to USE the new format on an iPod? Soem may say "it's for rregular Macs", but this size is too SMALL for to build a new standard for computers. So the only conclusion I can reach is that it has to be for a new iPod to come...
Front Row? iTV?
OllyW
Apr 5, 07:53 AM
That must mean I'm not normal. :D
Rodimus Prime
May 5, 07:50 PM
The "Apple Tax" is largely just in the mind. PC Magazine, and several tech blogs, have had comparisons and found that a Mac is cheaper than machines from some Windows machines (I think Sony and Dell were more expensive but I could be wrong). Out of five tested, the Mac was in the middle.
I did the math, and gave it up after I had consistently lousy experiences with every version of Windows I used, with hardware from a variety of well known manufacturers.
I will happily spend the imaginary premium if it provides with a stable operating system.
if maybe if you go spec for spec but often times you end up having to pay for a bunch of crap you do not need or want to get what you want from Apple.
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
I did the math, and gave it up after I had consistently lousy experiences with every version of Windows I used, with hardware from a variety of well known manufacturers.
I will happily spend the imaginary premium if it provides with a stable operating system.
if maybe if you go spec for spec but often times you end up having to pay for a bunch of crap you do not need or want to get what you want from Apple.
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
bellis1
Apr 3, 12:08 PM
I'm back to word now and it has grown on me some because of the comments ability, simple thesaurus/dict, and is compatible with reference software. However, it is very slow (almost unbearable) on my stock 256mb ibook. And more importantly it does not handle figures and table nearly as well as Pages. Consequently I do most of my typing in word and then work with my figures and table in pages and include them as a separate PDF. I also have Mellel which is also nice if I just want to write smoothly without any distractions.
And iwork is worth the price just for keynote. However, why doesn't keynote have a way to dim bulleted lists once you have gone over an individual bullet. I am envious of powerpoint only for this feature.
Thanks
And iwork is worth the price just for keynote. However, why doesn't keynote have a way to dim bulleted lists once you have gone over an individual bullet. I am envious of powerpoint only for this feature.
Thanks
bbeagle
Mar 23, 01:43 PM
This would greatly improve the usability of airplay, in my opinion.
Imagine you had your TV on some random channel, while surfing the internet on your iPad. If your TV supported AirPlay, then you could just click the Airplay button on your iPad, and the random channel would be changed to the Airplay content. You wouldn't have to change the tuners over to Apple TV. Much more convenient.
Imagine you had your TV on some random channel, while surfing the internet on your iPad. If your TV supported AirPlay, then you could just click the Airplay button on your iPad, and the random channel would be changed to the Airplay content. You wouldn't have to change the tuners over to Apple TV. Much more convenient.
Telomar
Sep 14, 12:08 AM
Just a few details. I can verify the subject of the post is genuine and as far I recall it has been pretty well talked about by Intel and planned for some time. It certainly hasn't been kept secret.
I would however be a touch surprised if it is called the PV. It really is very much an evolution of the PIV and nothing new.
The 1MB Level 2 cache is expected it roughly doubles every fabrication generation improvement at the moment. AMD has already planned the same for the Hammer series. The faster FSB is also nothing new or surprising.
The current PIV has ~55 million transistors though and a rough doubling over a fabrication generational change isn't unexpected.
Really there's nothing new there that Intel hasn't had roadmapped since early 2002 and before.
On the Apple side I have said this before and I will say it again. The G4 core has life. Improvements can be made to easily lift its performance substantially and there are things worth note coming :) Whether they will arrive on time is another matter and whether they will satisfy everybody I can't say but given people are rarely pleased I'd say probably not :p
I would however be a touch surprised if it is called the PV. It really is very much an evolution of the PIV and nothing new.
The 1MB Level 2 cache is expected it roughly doubles every fabrication generation improvement at the moment. AMD has already planned the same for the Hammer series. The faster FSB is also nothing new or surprising.
The current PIV has ~55 million transistors though and a rough doubling over a fabrication generational change isn't unexpected.
Really there's nothing new there that Intel hasn't had roadmapped since early 2002 and before.
On the Apple side I have said this before and I will say it again. The G4 core has life. Improvements can be made to easily lift its performance substantially and there are things worth note coming :) Whether they will arrive on time is another matter and whether they will satisfy everybody I can't say but given people are rarely pleased I'd say probably not :p
dot com
Jan 6, 03:33 PM
Go to the iphone settings and scroll down to the bottom and find the facebook tab. Select that, and then "Push notifications".
Viola.
Viola.
No comments:
Post a Comment